I'm routing messages to a couple of servers with the transport map
mechanism. I'm using recipient address verification to avoid bounce
messages. This works fine with mail servers that send a 550 response,
for example:
RCPT TO: non-existent-u...@somedomain.com
550 5.7.1 Unable to deliver to non-exi
Erwin Authried:
> I'm routing messages to a couple of servers with the transport map
> mechanism. I'm using recipient address verification to avoid bounce
> messages. This works fine with mail servers that send a 550 response,
> for example:
>
> RCPT TO: non-existent-u...@somedomain.com
> 550 5.7.
Wietse Venema:
> Erwin Authried:
> > I'm routing messages to a couple of servers with the transport map
> > mechanism. I'm using recipient address verification to avoid bounce
> > messages. This works fine with mail servers that send a 550 response,
> > for example:
> >
> > RCPT TO: non-existent-u
Am Freitag, den 26.12.2014, 18:35 -0500 schrieb Wietse Venema:
> Wietse Venema:
> > Erwin Authried:
> > > I'm routing messages to a couple of servers with the transport map
> > > mechanism. I'm using recipient address verification to avoid bounce
> > > messages. This works fine with mail servers th
Am Freitag, den 26.12.2014, 18:35 -0500 schrieb Wietse Venema:
> Wietse Venema:
> > Erwin Authried:
> > > I'm routing messages to a couple of servers with the transport map
> > > mechanism. I'm using recipient address verification to avoid bounce
> > > messages. This works fine with mail servers th
Awesome, thanks for everyone's advice.
On 12/25/14 7:19 PM, li...@rhsoft.net wrote:
oh and don't forget URIBL scores for SpamAssassin
URIBL_BLACK has a zero-false-positive policy
as said, sapmass-milter runs with block above 8.0 here and the default
max-message size which is scanned is *way*
